Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Faculty Development Research: The ‘State of the Art’ and Future Trends

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Faculty Development in the Health Professions

Part of the book series: Innovation and Change in Professional Education ((ICPE,volume 11))

Abstract

This chapter will describe and discuss the ‘state of the art’ of research and scholarship in faculty development, with particular reference to recently published systematic reviews. Some of the challenges facing scholars in the field will be explored, including the evaluation of complex interventions and the development of meaningful long-term outcome measures, placed in the broader context of concerns about the quality of medical education research. The chapter will conclude by posing a set of questions about faculty development that researchers and educators still need to answer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amundsen, C. & Wilson, M. (2012). Are we asking the right questions? A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 90–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albert, M., Hodges, B., & Regehr, G. (2007). Research in medical education: Balancing service and science. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 12(1), 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Evaluation Association. (2004). Guiding principles for evaluators. Retrieved August, 2012, from http://www.eval.org/p/cm/ld/fid=51

  • Cook, D. A. (2010). Twelve tips for evaluating educational programs. Medical Teacher, 32(4), 296–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A. (2012). If you teach them, they will learn: Why medical education needs comparative effectiveness research. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 17(3), 305–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A. & Beckman, T. J. (2010). Reflections on experimental research in medical education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(3), 455–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A., Beckman, T. J., & Bordage, G. (2007). Quality of reporting of experimental studies in medical education: A systematic review. Medical Education, 41(8), 737–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A., Bordage, G., & Schmidt, H. G. (2008). Description, justification and clarification: A framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education. Medical Education 42(2), 128–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 337(a1655), 979–983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dornan, T., Peile, E., & Spencer, J. (2008). On ‘evidence’. Medical Education, 42(3), 232–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eva, K. W. & Regehr, G. (2005). Self-assessment in the health professions: A reformulation and research agenda. Academic Medicine, 80(10 Suppl.), S46–S54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • General Medical Council. (2009a). Tomorrow’s Doctors: Outcomes and standards for undergraduate medical education. Available from: http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/undergraduate/tomorrows_doctors.asp

  • General Medical Council. (2009b). Good Medical Practice. London, UK: GMC. Retrieved August, 2012, from http://www.gmc-uk.org/

  • Goldie, J. (2006). AMEE Education Guide No. 29: Evaluating educational programmes. Medical Teacher, 28(3), 210–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraiger, K., Ford, J. K., & Salas, E. (1993). Application of cognitive, skill-based and affective theories of learning outcomes to new methods of training evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 311–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liaison Committee on Medical Education. (2012). Functions and structure of a medical school: Standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree. Available from: https://www.lcme.org/publications/functions2012may.pdf

  • Mazmanian, P. E. & Davis, D. A. (2002). Continuing medical education and the physician as a learner: Guide to the evidence. JAMA, 288(9), 1057–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCoubrie, P. (2007). Innovation in medical education: More than meets the eye. The Clinical Teacher, 4(1), 51–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, G. (2007). Editorial - How bad is medical education research anyway? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 12(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., & Walshe, K. (2005). Realist review: A new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(Suppl. 1), S1:21–S1:34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petticrew, M. (2011). When are complex interventions ‘complex’? When are simple interventions ‘simple’? European Journal of Public Health, 21(4), 397–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapid Responses, BMJ. (2007). Rapid responses to: Medical education research remains the poor relation, BMJ, 335(7615), 333–335. Available from: http://www.bmj.com/content/335/7615/333?tab=responses

  • Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. (2011). A continuing commitment to lifelong learning: A concise guide to Maintenance of Certification. Retrieved August, 2012, from http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/portal/rc/common/documents/moc_program/moc_short_guide_e.pdf

  • Silver, H. (2004). Evaluation research in education. Retrieved August, 2012, from http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/evaluation/index.htm

  • Skeff, K. M., Stratos, G. A., & Bergen, M. R. (1992). Evaluation of a medical faculty development program: A comparison of traditional pre/post and retrospective pre/post self-assessment ratings. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 15(3), 350–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Centeno, A., Dolmans, D., Spencer, J., Gelula, M., et al. (2006). A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness in medical education: BEME Guide No. 8. Medical Teacher, 28(6), 497–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinert, Y., Naismith, L., & Mann, K. (2012). Faculty development initiatives designed to promote leadership in medical education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 19. Medical Teacher, 34(6), 483–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stes, A., Min-Leliveld, M., Gijbels, D., & van Petegem, P. (2010). The impact of instructional development in higher education: The state-of-the-art of the research. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 25–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todres, M., Stephenson, A., & Jones, R. (2007). Medical education research remains the poor relation. BMJ, 335(7615), 333–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R. (2000). Remembering what happened: Memory errors and survey reports. In A. A. Stone, J. S. Turkkan, C. A. Bachrach, J. B. Jobe, H. S. Kurtzman, & V. S. Cain (Eds.), The science of self-report: Implications for research and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Taylor & Francis (e-book).

    Google Scholar 

  • Trochim, W. (2006). Research methods knowledge base: Introduction to evaluation. Cornell Office for Research on Evaluation: Web Center for Social Research Methods. Retrieved August, 2012, from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/intreval.php

  • UK Evaluation Society. (2013). Guidelines for good practice in evaluation. London, UK: UK Evaluation Society. Retrieved August 2012 from https://www.evaluation.org.uk/assets/UKES%20Guidelines%20for%20Good%20Practice%20January%202013.pdf

  • Wilkerson, L. & Irby, D. M. (1998). Strategies for improving teaching practices: A comprehensive approach to faculty development. Academic Medicine, 73(4), 387–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yardley, S. & Dornan, T. (2012). Kirkpatrick’s levels and education ‘evidence’. Medical Education, 46(1), 97–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Primary Care and Clinical Education, School of Medical Sciences Education Development, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

    John Spencer FRCGP

Authors
  1. John Spencer FRCGP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Spencer FRCGP .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fac. of Medicine, Centre for Med. Educ., McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada

    Yvonne Steinert

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Spencer, J. (2014). Faculty Development Research: The ‘State of the Art’ and Future Trends. In: Steinert, Y. (eds) Faculty Development in the Health Professions. Innovation and Change in Professional Education, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7612-8_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation